Okay, now they have a real shot at a title in 2013 (especially if Andy returns). I have faith that they’ll find someone to play right and Gardner’s return in left (or, Satan willing, center) will be huge. But finding #2 starters who can pitch great in the playoffs and are willing to sign a one-year deal is damn near impossible. Great job, Yankees.

Does anyone know how the sale of 49-80% of YES to Fox is structured? The 30 year rights deal scared me a little. Right now, the owners of YES gain if Yankees broadcasts become more profitable. If the rights deal has a fixed royalty (however large), the the team ownership will have a weaker incentive to spend on improving the team if Fox exercises its option and takes over 80% of YES (reducing the Steinbrenners ability to profit for YES’s increased viewership).

Axisa says that the Yankees can get 2 or 3 solid prospects for Granderson and I just love the idea. While the Yankees will miss him for one season, getting 2 solid prospects and 2 sandwich picks is exactly what the Yankees need in order to compete after the 2013 season.

More importantly, with Kuroda and Mo returning (and likely BattleCat), and heading into maybe the last year with Jeter and who knows if they keep Cano after this year, it’s clear this is an all-in for the title season (as long as they don’t have to sign anyone beyond 2013). So, I can’t see them trading Granderson when the OF will need his power to help them get to the post-season.

They can still get the pick for him when someone else overpays a corner OF with fading defensive skills who K’s 200+ times per season.

They already have one hole in the OF. No need to create another unless they get a crazy return that they can’t say no to.

[15,16,18] That link says their yearly take from YES will go from 85 million to 350 million in 30 years, which is a bit under 5% interest per year, so depending on your optimism about the economy and baseball, that is a little worrying. I think I would be more worried if it weren’t for our salary faux-cap. The Steinbrenner’s seem to be planning to use that to guide their spending anyways.

The fascinating aspect about the Steinbrenners has always been how relatively little money they actually have (at least compared to other owners). Unlike other owners who are billionaires before they bought their team, the Yankees basically ARE the Steinbrenner’s primary asset. So to me, what this sounds like is the Steinbrenners trying to solidify their position as owners of the Yankees going forward through this deal. And that actually kind of irritates me. Not that I want Fox or whoever to buy the Yankees, but I don’t like these owners who make deals designed just to hold on to their team, whether it helps the team itself or not. Wilpon and McCourt were the worst examples of this, but I fear that this is similar to their dealings.

That said, Tree is likely correct that the Yankees will probably be hovering around the top of the salary cap in the next few years no matter what. It is not like they were ever planning on going to, like, $250 million in 2015 or anything like that.

[23] That’s the amount that YES pays the Yankees to broadcast their games, if I read it correctly. So the Yankees get that regardless of their stake in YES. Also, they’re getting something like $600 million dollars for their sale of initial shares ($270M + a $400M or more “bonus”). So…I don’t see this really hurting the Yankee payroll, or ability to put other money into baseball operations.

I think there is a solid argument to be made that Newscorp - given they are a media behemoth - could have the ability to grow YES far beyond it’s current projected growth. If so, it’s very possible that 20% of a Newscorp owned YES could be worth more than 34% of the currently owned YES.

[20] Well, Mike A was just using recent past trades as a barometer. As for naming the team…I don’t think we can until later in the off-season, right? One definite candidate is Texas. If they lose Hamilton, and are unable to sign one of the other CF (or, aren’t impressed with said candidates), perhaps they’ll be willing to roll the dice with Granderson for a year. Could the Yankees get Mike Olt and some other lesser prospects? I don’t think that’s out of the question. May take some other pot-sweetening (e.g. Adam Warren) to make that work. Other teams may come along later as well.

Other potential teams - that we won’t know for sure until later in FA. Giants (won a WS, their starting CF is a FA). Braves (starting CF is a FA, playoff contender). Reds (some rumors they don’t like Stubbs, won division). Diamondbacks (if they manage to traded Upton, may want Granderson to play a corner). Probably a few other teams could end up looking to acquire a big bat.

I don’t think it’s *likely* they’ll find a good match, but certainly possible. I agree with Mike A though - unless Yankees are blown away, they shouldn’t make the trade. Alternatively, they could make the trade as part of some larger scheme to improve the OF and the team long-term.

[27] No I do not. I *do* however believe that I read in the past that the amount paid was actually very low. IIRC, the amount of money the Yankees received from YES for broadcasting games counted as revenue, but the amount they received as YES partners did not. So in order to keep the amount that counted as revenue (for revenue sharing) down, they Yankees got a below-market rate.

I wonder if MLB is changing the way revenue is accounted for going forward? If so, that could make perfect sense why the Yankees are doing what they’re doing. IDK if there’s one thing the Yankees have been VERY good at for the past 20 years it is making money. And it sounds like Hal is a numbers guy, and probably knows a lot about how to make money. I doubt that this deal with YES will likely COST the Yankees money any time soon…

Now granted, this is Verducci so take with a grain of salt. However, he reviewed some AFL prospects…

<blockqoute>7. Slade Heathcott, 22, Yankees, OF

MLB comp: Josh Hamilton

The comparison is bit unfair because Heathcott should not be expected to put up MVP numbers the way Hamilton has done. But it’s apt because Hamilton is Heathcott’s favorite player and Heathcott shares a profile with Hamilton that includes a power lefthanded bat, plus speed and the skills to play centerfield. The Yankees took him four picks after the Angels took Trout, New York’s pick if Trout were still on the board at 29.

Heathcott’s development has been slowed by two shoulder injuries, and though his power hasn’t translated into games quite yet, when you watch him take batting practice you see the bat speed and the ability to backspin balls are there. And there is one more skill to like: he plays with an all-out intensity in the vein of Trout and Harper. On an otherwise routine out at the plate in a fall league game, Heathcott plowed over the catcher.</blockquote>

Would anyone else be happy if he ends up with half of Hamilton’s major league success (and hopefully only half of Hamilton’s issues, as Heathcott is already an alcoholic)? There are also comments about Montgomery and Adams in the article…

[31] Yeah, unlikely. Unless he’s more talking about “type” of player rather than, “will have career like”. IOW, a player who could start at any of 2B, 3B, SS, but not field well enough at any to be a lock at the position. But at the same time hit well enough that he deserves to play every day. I could see that for Adams, maybe a little stronger on defense and obviously better worse at offense.

Actually, looking closer Young isn’t quite as good as I thought. Yes, he’s had some big years (136 wRC+ in 2005). But he’s only had 4 years w/ a wRC+ over 110 in 12 seasons. I mean, a non-1B IF who puts up a wRC+ between 100 and 110 is still very valuable, and the 104 for his career is nothing to sneeze at. But I think the high BA blinded me a bit. On second thought, maybe Adams *could* be like Young, just w/o the very high peaks.

I wish I could fastforward to see how Heathcott fares at AA and AAA. I agree that if he has continuing injury issues this young it doesnt bode well as his body gets older. That said, I am really encouraged by his AFL performance on the heels of a solid half season at Tampa.

As to Granderson, I have to agree with Ted, that he’s either a Yankee for his power potential for another year, or he’s shipped for an everyday outfielder that brings back present value. The idea that he would garner high top-side minor league prospects doesn’t seem to fit the mode of playing for now with the several golden oldie players.

I like getting Hamilton for one year and 25 Million but of course seriously he’s likely going to some other team in the AL east and I’m still picking the O’s.

Selig okayed the Marlins/Jays deal. Surely the best interest was never considered. So long as the [stupid] voters okayed beforehand [a few years ago IOW] the new ballpark Selig allows the deal to proceed now. Outrageous. Selig is less than worthless.

[33] I’d give Hamilton 4/100, possibly 5/125, with thoughts of letting Granderson and Cano walk after 2013. Though I’d seriously shop Granderson beforehand. Plus, Kuroda isn’t likely back for 2014, so they can certainly afford this. I’d also shop Tex around, see what he’d bring, you never know.

Not a lot of money, of course, but that’s still too much for Gomes. I wouldn’t even want him as a platoon DH. He had his second-best year last year, when he was 148 years old (I could be off by a few years on his age, I don’t have his Baseball Reference page in front of me). Seems like a major candidate for falling back to Earth this season.